You are here

Crescent Resources v. Burr (July 22, 2011)Issue: Does the Plan of Reorganization “specifically and unequivocally” retain the causes of action alleged in the Complaint?Holding: This Court finds that (1) the Plan preserved the claims made in the Complaint under Sections 544, 548, and 550 and turnover claims with language which was specific and unequivocal, (2) the Plan does not preserve the claims made in the Complaint under “state fraudulent transfer law,” and (3) the Court grants leave for the Plaintiff to amend the Complaint consistent with this Opinion. The Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss should be DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.

Ingalls v. Phillips (November 4, 2009)Ingalls v. Phillips (November 3, 2009)Issue: Should Trustee’s Complaint for turnover of funds that the Trustee asserts were improperly retained by Defendant in connection with his representation of Debtor be granted?Holding: Yes. No matter how this case is dissected, Defendant has no legal authority for his retention of the funds paid to him by the Debtor during the Chapter 13 part of this case without Court permission and in violation of a prior Court order.